Having a discussion with atheists and anti-theist lately. Lets see how long this discussion can go without the moderators getting involved.
The Anti-Theist on the moral questions: There are many, but I’ll bring up this conversation specifically.
They claim that morality is only good or bad once someone understands and agrees on what is good and bad about the moral statements made about a topic. Otherwise, the person following the moral claims, made but do not understand why they are moral or agree that they are moral, are just acting according to the direction of those rules. They have suspended their moral assessment on the issue and are just following orders with no understanding why they should be doing something. They are a trained pet told to get off the couch without ever understanding why being on the couch is a bad idea at all. So the claim that anything from a deity is, by default, a moral statement or ruling is taking it too far. Someone can have a track record of having made moral statements and actions, but every action and statement made still needs to be assessed. For a biblical example they reference is the bible’s references to slavery. Not how to care for your slaves, but just the idea of owning another person as property regardless of how well you treat them; treat them as well or better than your own family, and it’s still morally wrong to own another person. They believe that there is no context where owning another person as property is ever a moral action take to solve the problem the people were facing. From this conversation, they don’t find that the religious community is a morally serious community since they proudly espouse that there is nothing their deity could do that would make them believe their deity was immoral and not worth having a relationship with and even an entity to fight against. There is nothing it could do that would change that. So the religious come across as just wanting to appease the biggest bully in the room and have given up their morality in return for a reward and to avoid punishment. Somethings are worth fighting for, regardless if your actions would actually make a difference to the opposition. The bully needs their cronies and people to bully. But they have power by might alone. Have anyone come across this line of conversation with the anti-theist community and what gives you push back to their observations on the religious community and it’s involvement in religious politics and it’s claims that religion is a moral system?